Apt-get and Synaptic both show the following packages as autoremovable on my system:
The following packages will be REMOVED:
libpolkit-dbus2 libpolkit-gnome0 libpolkit-grant2 libpolkit2 policykit
policykit-gnome
Has anyone been brave enough to remove them yet?
I haven't. The amount of permissions problems (particularly involving network manager) that I have read about just recently make me very reluctant to do anything to policykit/policykit1, it seems to be flaky enough as it is without removing parts of it that might matter ( I wouldn't really know).
Last edited by LockBot on Wed Dec 28, 2022 7:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason:Topic automatically closed 6 months after creation. New replies are no longer allowed.
Think this may have something to with new ubuntu tweak, it mentions something about removing support for old version of policy kit. I haven't been brave enough to remove them either.
[Edit] your original post and add [SOLVED] once your question is resolved.
“The people are my God” stressing the factor determining man’s destiny lies within man not in anything outside man, and thereby defining man as the dominator and remoulder of the world.
mikeyb wrote:Think this may have something to with new ubuntu tweak, it mentions something about removing support for old version of policy kit. I haven't been brave enough to remove them either.
Ah! that is interesting - I just installed that this morning, I didn't connect the two.
Well I took the plunge and removed the old policykit files, so far with no ill effect. Following this up on ubuntu site, it seems most things were migrated to policykit-1 in karmic by release but there was no gui for editing rules. This still appears to be the case.
[Edit] your original post and add [SOLVED] once your question is resolved.
“The people are my God” stressing the factor determining man’s destiny lies within man not in anything outside man, and thereby defining man as the dominator and remoulder of the world.
mikeyb wrote:Well I took the plunge and removed the old policykit files, so far with no ill effect. Following this up on ubuntu site, it seems most things were migrated to policykit-1 in karmic by release but there was no gui for editing rules. This still appears to be the case.
You can say that again! 'Authorisations' is virtually empty, so there appears no way to change anything unless you know how to write/edit xml files (which I suppose is what the config files are written in these days). This creep towards user control 'evaporating' is blighting Linux at the moment, making it more and more like Windows every day. I don't intend to learn scripting languages just so I can edit my grub menu or make my network manager stop asking for passwords (that is not a problem I have, but it is a common one at the moment) and a newcomer to Linux is going to take one look, laugh out loud and go straight back to Windows if this carries on.
viking777 wrote:This creep towards user control 'evaporating' is blighting Linux at the moment, making it more and more like Windows every day. I don't intend to learn scripting languages just so I can edit my grub menu
I agree users shouldn't have to learn scripting languages to be able to operate or maintain their OS, however I'm looking at these changes as moving along the line of guification and simplification of operation. Lets face it, most users especially those coming over from a windows OS, are uncomfortable with the terminal and complex 'technical looking' dialogs. There seems to be a gradual drift, deliberate or not, towards a completely gui and simplified DE both with GNOME and KDE, perhaps with the aim of making things more attractive and easy to use for the majority of users. Some may call it 'dumbing down'. Providing this does not completely remove the facilities for more experienced or hands on users to do things their way then I have no problem with this. Hopefully a gui for the new policykit will be forthcoming?
[Edit] your original post and add [SOLVED] once your question is resolved.
“The people are my God” stressing the factor determining man’s destiny lies within man not in anything outside man, and thereby defining man as the dominator and remoulder of the world.
mikeyb wrote:
I agree users shouldn't have to learn scripting languages to be able to operate or maintain their OS, however I'm looking at these changes as moving along the line of guification and simplification of operation. Lets face it, most users especially those coming over from a windows OS, are uncomfortable with the terminal and complex 'technical looking' dialogs. There seems to be a gradual drift, deliberate or not, towards a completely gui and simplified DE both with GNOME and KDE, perhaps with the aim of making things more attractive and easy to use for the majority of users. Some may call it 'dumbing down'. Providing this does not completely remove the facilities for more experienced or hands on users to do things their way then I have no problem with this. Hopefully a gui for the new policykit will be forthcoming?
No arguments on that score from me mikeyb - I never use a command line solution if a suitable gui alternative exists, and I don't see it as 'dumbing down' either, in fact it is more the opposite. This is exactly illustrated by policykit and grub2 - we have the 'uneditable' files that go with these solutions (uneditable for me anyway) but no gui substitute and this makes Linux more complex not easier. Maybe the gui alternatives will come with time, but for now it means a loss of control even for a relatively experienced user.
I am sure if I were a developer/programmer I would get far more flexibility from shell scripts and xml files than plain text files but as an end user I lose a lot of control unless I learn those skills as well. I don't feel inclined to do that and I would imagine that new users would be even less so.
viking777 wrote:Maybe the gui alternatives will come with time, but for now it means a loss of control even for a relatively experienced user.
Maybe that's the whole point? Maybe this is a move towards saying that there are some things that users just shouldn't be messing with. Look at how many boot/grub problems are posted in the forums here then scale that up to ubuntu and other distros and you could argue that allowing ordinary users easy access to and editing of boot files is not necessarily a good thing. The same could be said of other system components. If you look at what MS and Apple do with their OSes, users only have (easy) access to the things they should be able to change. System innards are by and large off limits.
Funny but I kinda expected more disagreement from you!
[Edit] your original post and add [SOLVED] once your question is resolved.
“The people are my God” stressing the factor determining man’s destiny lies within man not in anything outside man, and thereby defining man as the dominator and remoulder of the world.
viking777 wrote:Maybe the gui alternatives will come with time, but for now it means a loss of control even for a relatively experienced user.
Maybe that's the whole point? Maybe this is a move towards saying that there are some things that users just shouldn't be messing with. Look at how many boot/grub problems are posted in the forums here then scale that up to ubuntu and other distros and you could argue that allowing ordinary users easy access to and editing of boot files is not necessarily a good thing. The same could be said of other system components. If you look at what MS and Apple do with their OSes, users only have (easy) access to the things they should be able to change. System innards are by and large off limits.
Funny but I kinda expected more disagreement from you!
Sorry to disappoint you mikeyb! Cause I kind of agree with that as well!
My only difference from what you say is that a grub menu (or start menu - look at how xfce works, or doesn't) is not really 'system innards' it is a user interface and therefore should be accessible and configurable to all just as much as a desktop wallpaper for example.
viking777 wrote:it is a user interface and therefore should be accessible and configurable
Grub is akin to Windows bootmgr in vista/Win7. There is only a command line interface by default. IOW ordinary users are not encouraged to mess with it. However it is still configurable to those willing to learn how. Interestingly it took 3rd parties to provide a gui config.
viking777 wrote:Sorry to disappoint you
[Edit] your original post and add [SOLVED] once your question is resolved.
“The people are my God” stressing the factor determining man’s destiny lies within man not in anything outside man, and thereby defining man as the dominator and remoulder of the world.
I have got to stop agreeing with you all the time Mike!
Again you are right, grub is akin to windows boot loader, but although I hardly ever use windows these days I think the difference between the two is that what windows used to provide as a default boot menu bore some resemblance to what was actually on the computer whereas grub2 provides unalterable garbage! On each install it identifies Ubuntu as Linux Mint (which is pretty confusing as I have both installed), Sidux is identified as Debian and Pclinux was not identified at all it just sticks a kernel number in the 'title' line - very informative! It also insists that I have two copies of Windows installed - I am embarrassed enough to own up to having one never mind two Add to that the fact that it uses uuid's by default and I don't wish to, then about a dozen other slightly less irritating 'features' and I feel pretty well compelled to alter it somehow.
Yet another point of agreement is that third party providers will probably end up developing a gui to deal with grub2. Startupmanager is a beginning, but it has a very long way to go to meet my desires.
Add to that the fact that it uses uuid's by default and I don't wish to, then about a dozen other slightly less irritating 'features' and I feel pretty well compelled to alter it somehow.